to change the subject away from vince young, who needs a chance to improve, maybe next season. matt moore should be given a shot in carolina. delhomme has been good for them, but he is starting to falter. i am not saying just hand it over to moore, but give him a fighting chance. he played well when given the opportunity.

I agree, but as long as Delhomme is there and so is Fox, I think you guys are going to ride the Delhomme train. What will be interesting is to see what the fans do come August, and during preseason. I could see a Romoesque type mutiny whe the Cowboys went with Romo over Bledsoe. So it is possible.

My main question with this thread, contrary to the Young argument, was the position of Marc Bulger. I have a hard teim believing that he will ever go back to the Bulger from 2006 and prior. I know about the lack of offensive line depth and the lack of playmakers to a certain extent. But he, just him as a QB, has not performed at a level that is even recognizable to what we saw back in the good ol'days.

So I wonder with the chance to grab Stafford or Sanchez do the Rams take the gamble on one of the young elite QBs in this draft? Or do they back off of that theory and go with the OT and hope that Bulger can turn it around. I know the ladder seems easier and less controversial, but the prior theory stands to help the team in the long haul and make them a quality club regardless. I mean only the Bengals can't seem to win in spite of having an elite QB, but thats more front office then personal problems.

I suppose if there's a time to do it, nows it. A 12-4 team that only needs some slight defensive line help, new coach used to working with Qbs, solid offensive line, excellent running game, good recievers. No time like the present.

It might be a little more than slight...

I feel okay saying that because the Charger defense was scary and littered with Pro Bowlers and playmakers that all looked untouchable, until they lost their All-Pro rusher.

I feel okay saying that because the Charger defense was scary and littered with Pro Bowlers and playmakers that all looked untouchable, until they lost their All-Pro rusher.

I agree, but the Panthers' collapse was more due to stupid scheme and play changes during the bye week. The beginning of the year when the Panthers D was 2nd in points allowed dropped to 10th (I think) when the schemes changed from being simple, let the team play, to being more rigid zonal crap.

Peppers leaving is going to be a major kick to the crotch, but one DT and another De to add to the rotation (2 very promising young ends already) and we'll be on the way. Charles Johnson was impressive last year and Hilee Taylor was as well pre-injury. Another, more every down end and a DT and the defense shouldn't falter too much.

If you say so, he still went form 51% to 62% while increasing his yards per pass with a crappy supporting cast.

Your argument is like me saying Mario Williams isn't good because even though he's putting up nice numbers, the defense for the Texans still blows. Why is that? Because you need to have a great supporting cast around you, and Vince had terrible receivers and a very mediocre running game, and he still put up better completion percentage. He had some bad interceptions, but that's what happens when you have to force passes into garbage.

I'm not saying he can't get a whole lot better, but he's not as bad as you want to believe, it seems to be a trend around here that we glorify all of the guys who have weapons around them and crucify the guys who can't put up pro bowl numbers with garbage around them.

Good post - I was beginning to think no one actually watched Vince as a rookie and in 07. Yeah, he had some terrible games in 07, but people seem to forget just how terrible a passer he was as a rookie. There is absolutely no doubt he improved as a passer from rookie to 07, unfortunately in the process he significantly dropped as a scrambler, so his effectiveness all round probably suffered a net loss.

The logic here is simple. There's no secret that as a rookie, Vince was rushed into a downward spiraling team as a last resort to save a season, which he basically did, or at least greatly assisted in doing. Many Titans fans attribute Vince's arrival as a big influence on the eventual team's quick turn around we see today - if he wasn't winning games more or less on his own in 06 (@ Houston, NY Giants), he was bringing a fresh new winning attitude to the team and some offensive leadership, both of which were sorely missing at the time. He was playing without self doubt and the weight of the NFL hadn't yet set in.

At the same time though, Vince's rookie season was a sacrifice of sorts. A 'deal with the devil' - a deal which some argue saved Fisher's job. The cost of bringing Vince along like this was his development. They plucked Vince in a simple single-read offense and told him to play like he had nothing to lose. This worked to some degree, but defenses would surely soon catch on, so Vince couldn't sustain a career like this.

So really, Vince's proper development as an NFL QB started in his 2007 season. Right from the start of 07 you could see the guy was making more reads, which slowed down his decisions to scramble, often leaving it too late and resulting in sacks or minimal gains on the ground. Vince was basically starting from scratch in 07 at QB in the NFL - the 06 season didn't offer much in the way of learning the details of the QB position for Vince. He was being played under a false system that had no long term survivability.

And despite this, he still put up better passing numbers across the board except the TD:INT ratio (which didn't stop his rating improving, further suggesting just how much he improved in other areas). However, when a guy like Kerry Collins comes in a year later with an actual weapon on offense in Chris Johnson, a better OL, an improving Gage at WR and Scaife at TE, and a better OC, and he only puts up 3 more passing TD's than Vince's 07 season, one has to wonder if Vince didn't just suffer from bad luck at times. I know I can recall a handful of blatant drops that would have likely resulted in TDs, not to mention some in the actual end zone. On at least a few occasions Vince directly followed up these incidents with INTs, which may not have occured had his teammates made a play before hand.

And then we have the 2008 season, which is a wash. We learned nothing from Vince, really, which is a shame, because a team like the Titans can no longer rely on a project at QB developing. They need effectiveness at QB now, so Vince's removal from the team may have more to do with the fact the players around him have developed too quickly, and not so much he has too slowly.

Congrates on making my thread another Young argument, and hijacking it to where it has become irrellevent.

All I meant to do was to shed light on the misconceptions about Vince. I did so while pertaining to your topic, and I have not hijacked it. You asked when the Titans GM and team should start looking at other options beside Vince, and I answered you.

To reiterate more specifically, Vince Young is looked to as the future QB of the Titans. Kerry Collins's play this past season changed nothing, and while the Titans want Collins back, their preliminary was 2-years/4 million dollars, which is an insult if the Titans GM is planning on Collins being the automatic starter. In the past, I stated that Vince needed 3 seasons in order for me to determine if he's a bust or not. Currently, he's played one full season. He was thrown into the fire in the middle of his rookie season, and he didn't start a game in 2007 aside from the 1st game where his injury occurred. No action should take place for another season. Vince got a pass this season because of injury and the team's success, but now it's do or die for him and the Titans organization to get the QB position settled.

Quote:

Also as for Jason Whitlock insult...

Jason Whitlock may be paid for his occupation, but that doesn't make him reputable. You don't become reputable because of how much money you make. You become reputable by the quality of your work. You brought up mine and njx9's reputation level and post count, but do you think us having high rep or high post count affects how other active posters receive our opinions? No. The only thing it may do is afford us and our opinions respect. But, you can respect another person's opinion and at the same time tell them they're dead wrong.

I'm not a journalist like Whitlock is, but I'm fine with that. It would ruin sports for me. It may be another person's bag, but I only want to write when I'm inspired to do so. If it ever felt like a job, I'd dread doing it. So I'm just fine being a normal sports fan. But the notion that a sports fan criticizing a sports writer is low or lame is ridiculous. That's like saying a customer at a restaurant questioning the price of the food is wrong because they're not a chef. Like any business, Whitlock's success depends on people buying what he's selling. But in my opinion, Whitlock is fast food. Just because a lot of people read his material doesn't mean it's gourmet. As for me, I prefer to eat in.

I have a hard teim believing that he will ever go back to the Bulger from 2006 and prior. I know about the lack of offensive line depth and the lack of playmakers to a certain extent. But he, just him as a QB, has not performed at a level that is even recognizable to what we saw back in the good ol'days.

So I wonder with the chance to grab Stafford or Sanchez do the Rams take the gamble on one of the young elite QBs in this draft? Or do they back off of that theory and go with the OT and hope that Bulger can turn it around. I know the ladder seems easier and less controversial, but the prior theory stands to help the team in the long haul and make them a quality club regardless. I mean only the Bengals can't seem to win in spite of having an elite QB, but thats more front office then personal problems.

He looked a bit better towards the end of the season but he is surrounded by almost no talent. Keep in mind that he used to have two #1 receivers and a decent o-line to protect him (like Kurt Warner does now).

And then we have the 2008 season, which is a wash. We learned nothing from Vince, really, which is a shame, because a team like the Titans can no longer rely on a project at QB developing. They need effectiveness at QB now, so Vince's removal from the team may have more to do with the fact the players around him have developed too quickly, and not so much he has too slowly.

Don't take this as a snide comment Ozzy, but we did learn something from 2008: we learned Vince is capable of pouting and being excessively negative...while his team is winning (week 1). That is a terrible attitude for a QB to have, because the leader sets the tone for the team. As for the supposed nervous breakdown or whatever the hell it was, I'm sure it was largely overblown...but not entirely. Titans are built too solidly to depend on an emotional wreck like Vince, I think they are already over him.

I meant more from a QB skills point of view, i.e. we learned nothing about his progress as a QB after the snap.

It's hard to say what we really learned overall from 2008 as there is still dot connecting going on. What the team learned, which is what really matters, will probably become more obvious in the coming weeks and months.

I agree though, the Titans aren't built for a shakey QB right now. In hindsight, a QB in 2006 was probably going to be a bad move regardless. Mario Williams would have been the ideal pick for the Titans knowing in 2008 they'd be the #1 AFC seed.

I'm not sure Cutler would be that great a QB on the Titans. At least, it's hard to draw anything from his time in Denver as evidence as the Broncos offense is about as opposite as you can get to the Titans offense.

Obviously Mario wasn't available, I just meant overall. From those available at 3, I'm not really sure who the Titans could have taken instead of a QB, and I'm not sure any of the big 3 QB's would be very secure right now as a Titan.

I'm not sure Cutler would be that great a QB on the Titans. At least, it's hard to draw anything from his time in Denver as evidence as the Broncos offense is about as opposite as you can get to the Titans offense.

Obviously Mario wasn't available, I just meant overall. From those available at 3, I'm not really sure who the Titans could have taken instead of a QB, and I'm not sure any of the big 3 QB's would be very secure right now as a Titan.

2006 will probably eventually be known as the "damnit, how did we pass on Ngata" draft by a lot of teams.

lol yeah, although at the time he wasn't really keying for a top 3 slot.

It was either Bush, Mario, VY, Cutler, Leinart, Hawk or Ferguson for the Titans realistically. First 2 went, Hawk wasn't needed, Ferg wasn't needed, so it came down to QB, and as I said, short of a Matt Ryan style start, a QB for the Titans there wasn't going to be ideal assuming 2007 and 2008 went more or less the same.

Looking back, Cutler would have been safer by now probably but I think Vince was worth the risk. And it's not like the story is over yet, either.

Okay, so now hopefully we got the Vince Young debate out of our systems, what do you guys think of both Marc Bulger and Matt Hasselback?

I've said it earlier, but I definitly think that the Rams should take the oppertunity to pick Stafford or Sanchez.

As for the Seahawks, I think they are in a bit of a struggle here. They might not get a shot at either Sanchez or Stafford, but I think they could go after maybe Josh Freeman or Nate Davis in the 2nd or 3rd and develope them as the successor to Hasselback.

I think if Stafford drops you go for it, I'm just not high enough on Sanchez I guess.

I just don't see any skill that is better than an average starter in the NFL, though he has no glaring weakness.

I think the same thing, I just can't see ateam that has a weak QB who is obviously passed his prime, and not take a franchise type player. It's hard for me to believe that the Rams or Seahawks can be that confident in either Hasselback or Bulger. I just don't see how a team can say, "these are the guys we want playing that position this year and next."

So I think if you have the oppertunity to select a guy, and by the way they might not get another chance to select a top 5 QB, they have to jump on it. Maybe its just wishful thinking because I'm so sick of being one of the franchises that hasn't drafted a QB in the 1rst round of the last 25 years. It's just pathetic and unacceptable.

Okay, so now hopefully we got the Vince Young debate out of our systems, what do you guys think of both Marc Bulger and Matt Hasselback?

Well, I think we know what you think of Bulger. Your posts come off more as vehement hatred towards the guy rather than an objective analysis of his current status. I don't really understand that...

Anyways, I agree with you that Bulger has regressed during the last two years. I think his confidence has taken a pounding, as has his pocket awareness, and I feel as if he's uncomfortable going through his progressions in large part because he doesn't know if he's going to have the time to do it. Marc is going to have to take steps to personally improve his own game if he's going to really come out of his slump.

With that said, it's important to note that his regression took place on two pretty bad teams. The offensive line play in 2007 was simply atrocious. The Rams were going three or four players deep at nearly every offensive line position. In 2008, the OL only began to show improvement towards the end of the year and even then certainly still needs big improvements. Contrary to your claim, Bulger's bookends did not play every single game nor did they play well. Pace missed two games in 2008, though I would agree he played well. Barron on the other hand was still a disappointment. Though he played in sixteen games, he allowed a team high 7.5 sacks and committed nine penalties, which shockingly is a career best but still atrocious. You categorized the interior line play as "suspect;" I think that's being pretty generous, actually.

When you look beyond the offensive line, right now, there simply is not much there to work with. Jackson is a top talent when he's on the field, but missed four games and was a non-factor in a fifth because he was trying to play hurt. On at least two occasions that I can recall, Jackson was taken out in the fourth quarter of games for some reason, even though the Rams still had chances to win. He's not getting much consistent help from his offensive line in opening up running lanes, and he has absolutely nothing at fullback. Numerous times this season, turnovers and the Rams' porous defense allowed games to get out of hand to the point where Jackson's presence in games were minimal.

On top of that, Torry Holt is simply not the player he used to be. Knee injuries have cut into his speed and effectiveness running routes; he doesn't get the kind of separation he used to and is not the top receiver he was as recently as two years ago. Avery has shown a lot of talent but is still raw. There were plenty of reports during the year about how the Rams' rookie receivers (Avery and Keenan Burton) were running the wrong routes and not adjusting to hot routes in response to blitz situations. Besides Holt and maybe Avery, the Rams have little else at receiver. Randy McMichael was lost after four games.

All of this probably sounds like I'm trying to make excuses for Marc Bulger. That's not the case; I've already emphasized that Bulger has to take it upon himself to improve in areas he's not performing well if he wants to really come out of this slump. But the Rams didn't finish 2-14 solely because of the quarterback; they are simply not a very talented team right now. I'm not sure there's a position you can point to on this team and say it doesn't need to get better. QB, RB, WR, TE, OL, DL, LB, DB... all of it needs help. The question becomes whether or not the guys already there can make the necessary improvements, or if new talent needs to come in.

It's an interesting question, and an even more interestingly timed post from a Rams perspective. Because a day after your original post, Rams GM Billy Devaney did an interview on WFAN regarding the new head coach hiring and a number of other issues. One of the questions that came up was Bulger. Not only did Devaney express confidence that Bulger still has some football left to be played, but in reference to how the head coaching candidates felt about the Rams' personnel, Devaney said that, "When you get to the quarterback, to a man, every one of them said the same thing - you can win with this guy."

I tend to agree with that, which means disagreeing with you when you say there isn't much life left in Bulger. I feel he started to come out of his slump in the final few games of the season as the protection started to get consistently better. Having Jackson back in the line-up averaging nearly 30 touches per game in the final four games probably helped as well.
Bulger has taken a beating in his time with the Rams, and at 32, no one can say he's in the prime of his career. Sooner rather than later, the Rams need to start looking for a young guy they can groom for the future. But give Bulger some protection and some talent to work with, and I think he can still be an efficient passer in this league.

But even looking beyond his play, one has to take into consideration the other factors that play into the possibility of taking a quarterback. First of all, Bulger's contract is a huge hurdle. His cap charge for 2009 is $8.5 million. How much does a rookie QB add to that? Matt Ryan's '08 cap charge as a rookie was $2.8 million. We're now a year later and talking about a pick that's one position higher; I think it's fair to assume the cap charge for a rookie QB drafted by the Rams would be larger. So now we're talking about Bulger's $8.5 million charge combined with a rookie's $3+ million, and you're looking at over $11.5 million - likely a tenth of the team's total cap space - devoted to one position where only one guy is on the field at a time.

So what happens if the Rams cut Bulger to make room for their rookie? Well, Bulger's cap cost increases to $11 million if he's cut this offseason. $11 million in dead money for a guy that's no longer on your team, combined again with the guesstimate $3+ million cap charge for the rookie QB. Now the Rams are looking at over $14 million in cap charges for a QB who isn't there and a QB who is going to get thrown to the wolves. Because let's not pretend that Stafford or Sanchez without Bulger in front of him aren't going to be rushed on the field before either is ready.

It's not as if the Rams are in great cap shape, either - an estimate from today from the Sporting News and Draft Sharks approximates the Rams' 2009 cap figure to be only $8 million on the positive side. So, can they afford to carry Bulger AND a second overall QB in 2009? I don't believe they can. And the costs get worse if they try to cut Bulger to make room for the rook. Financially, I'm hard-pressed to find a way this works.

You say the Rams have no choice but to select a QB high in the draft, that it's almost a no brainer, that for the Rams, it's a must. I simply don't see it that way, not only because of my opinion about Bulger's potential to rebound with more talent around him and improvements in his own play, but also because of the financial implications in doing so. When is it time for the Rams to move on? The Rams are going to have to live at least for a little while longer with the $65 million contract they gave Marc Bulger two summers ago. Teams can't just dish out that kind of money and then wipe the slate clean in a couple of seasons if things don't work out. I think moving Bulger becomes a more realistic discussion after 2009, if his play remains unsatisfactory, but even then the numbers will probably not be incredibly favorable. Those kinds of huge deals carry big consequences, consequences that the Rams are going to have to deal with by keeping Bulger around for the time being and in all likelihood passing on one of this year's top QB prospects.

Besides, if Bulger continues to disappoint and remains as bad as you believe he is, then the Rams will likely have another chance to select a top five quarterback. :)

Surprised that Tony Romo doesnt get some attention. For a franchise that has had the likes of Don Meredith, Roger Staubach and Troy Aikman they seem to have regressed.

Dallas shot themselves in the foot when they made the trade for Roy Williams from Detroit. They basically lost their baraining power to move up in this years draft. I wonder what Troy Aikman would say about that.

I had to comment on this after reading all the posts on the VY debate (sorry to bring this topic back, but my post will be short). It seemed like a complete bias against VY by MarioPalmer, however I really dislike calling someone a bust until they are given a fair amount of time. How long did it take you MarioPalmer to call David Carr a bust? Was it the same three years you have given Young? I also think that the reason he was given so many adjectives (ie. Superman) was because he came off perhaps the greatest game a college quarterback ever played in a bowl game. I still think more time is needed, and that is my whole hearted opinion.

First off, the David Carr bust came at the end of the 2005 Season, I knew then we needed to do something about the position, but I was also intrigued by this bohemoth that was destroying it at the Combine and putting up a new standard for the Prototype at the 43 DE spot. I was also at least just a little intrigued about what Kubes could do with Carr, remember this is the guy that helped Plummer who was essentially David Carr in a Bronco Uni. But it was 4 years, and this was after his 3rd season which he had looked great and on his way to becoming a franchise QB. But his 4 th season was so bad, that it shook everyones confidence in him.

Young, to me at least, has shown nothing, we all have our opinions on him and he will forever have his fans, I get that, but so did Carr. He had his fans all the way to Carolina. And they actually thought he would excell there given their talent and defense. But he was even worse. Young shows some of the same errors as Carr. Doesn't want to put the work in, think that since he was drafted #3 Overall everything should be handed to him and fans should always be on his side. Thats not how these things work.

Please, lets not discuss him, until he starts and until he starts to show legit progression as a top franchise QB he will be a bust, if your drafted 3rd overall and are sitting in your 3rd year and your team is winning in spite of you, your future does not look good. Thats just the truth of the matter.

As for Bulger, yes I dislike him. I have always disliked him. But its not because of the Warner being here first. I actually disliked him more. The reason, maybe being a stubborn fan here, but the reason why I want a QB is because this team has never had one. In 25 years the Rams haven't drafted a QB in the 1rst and in 25 years this team has been a real contender in 3 years. And when, realistically will they have another shot to get a quality QB? This will be the 3rd year out of the last 4 that the Rams have a shot at a top elite QB prospect. 2006 it was Cutler, in 2008 it was Ryan and in 2009 it will be Stafford or Sanchez. I think thats a sign and you can't honestly sit there and tell me that Cutler or Ryand wouldn't be better for this team, you just can't.

Thats my point. I'm sick of seeing block head and that dumb plain look on his face with those ridiculous looking bird legs and stupid looking flak jacket that looks like a life preserver running around with that weak arm of his. Its time for change...damnit...lol

But MP you're thinking of Vince along the standard QB progression but everyone knew Vince would take longer, I really thought Vince needed 5-6 years before we saw him become a real QB and not just a runner, I thought that's how long it'd take him to go from Vick to McNabb so I still think he's got time, he's just gotta get his head straight and start working on getting there.

But MP you're thinking of Vince along the standard QB progression but everyone knew Vince would take longer, I really thought Vince needed 5-6 years before we saw him become a real QB and not just a runner, I thought that's how long it'd take him to go from Vick to McNabb so I still think he's got time, he's just gotta get his head straight and start working on getting there.

But in todays NFL, do we really have time to wait for a QB to progress in that kind of time table. Especially with the way quarterbacks like Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, Ben Rothlisberger, Carson Palmer (2nd year full time starter and has been elite ever since), Eli Manning, Payton Manning, Jay Cutler and even QBs like Jason Campbell have progressed in a much shorter time and he was never considered the QB prospect that Young was.

I think had Vince Young been drafted in the late 1rst or early second round then yes, I agree that he could take up to 4 or 5 years to grow as a QB, but because he was picked at such a high pick with the kind of expectations that go with that draft slot he was put in the position to be the franchise, to be the leader, to be the guy who would be an elite QB by his 3rd year. Not what we are seeing from him now.

Look, I do have a bais opinion of him, but it has nothing to do with Mario Williams, its mo9re about respect and when a player deserves such hype. I hate when a player is given everything without really accomplishing anything. For instance, Reggie Bush has had more Subway commercials and more hype then Josepg Addai, which one is the better RB? Young has been more a commericla success then Jay Cutler.....why? Brady Quinn has had commercial sucess then Philip Rivers and Aaron Rogers and both are twice the QB he is. Itws unwarranted, and to me I don't like it. It takes away from the popularity of certain players that are really really good, because they are over shadowed by over rated "College Stars". Thats exactly what is going to happen when Tim Tebow gets to the NFL. Can you imagine what kind of corny commercials we will have to endure from him? Sam Bradford will most liekly be a top 10 pick and he will get blown away compared to the type of media crap a guy like Tebow, who will barely be a 3rd rounder.

One thing I love about the NFL is that talent talks and ******** walks. Guys like Bush, Young, Tebow and Quinn (still has a ways to go before dumping on him, but he's not to far away) will be exploited and completely exposed. They can;t hide behind playing bad opponents or poor help and countless excuses.

Thats why professional sports are so much better than amature games. Because the best succeed regardlessof where they come from. I love that guys like Rasheen Mathias and Ronald Bartell have done better than high profile guys that came from big time programs and that got a ton of media attention. I love that a guy from Vanderbilt that played on a horrid team in a program that is second rate can beat out two guys that came from football schools where the QBs are worshipped like Gods. I think its great that a kid from Santa Claus, IN can be head and shoulders better then two QBs from Houston and LA that went 2 huge college programs that are considered small citys. Thats why I love this game, because good looks and charisma just don't cut it. You actually have to have the passion, skill, talent and work ethic to be better than the competition. And right now I don't see that kind of passion from Vince Young.

And when, realistically will they have another shot to get a quality QB?

Simple - if Bulger's as bad as you think he is, they'll probably have a shot next season. Besides, let's not pretend that the Rams have to have a top five pick in order to have a chance at a quality signal caller.